Legal Opinion
State v. Ramirez
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided June 29, 1999No. CX-99-181PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HALBROOKS, Judge
Appellant State of Minnesota challenges the district court’s pretrial order dismissing respondent’s welfare fraud charge on equitable estoppel grounds. Appellant argues equitable estoppel is not available to a criminal defendant and, even if it were, its requirements were not met in this case. Respondent contends the district court’s order is not appealable. Respondent also requests attorney fees under Minn. R.Crim. P. 28.04, subd. 2(6), by separate motion. Because we determine the order is appealable and equitable estoppel does not apply under the facts of this case,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Frost-Benco Electric Ass'n v. Minnesota Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- United States v. Lazy Fc RanchCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1973
- Ridgewood Development Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Mesaba Aviation Division of Halvorson of Duluth, Inc. v. County of ItascaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Brown v. Minnesota Department of Public WelfareSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Northern States Power Co. v. City of Mendota HeightsCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002
- Concept Properties, LLP v. City of MinnetristaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2005
- Prairie Island Indian Community v. Minnesota Department of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
- Joel Karnitz v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2009
- State v. DrownCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2011
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.